County hears proposal to ready county-owned site for industrial park; developer proposes data‑center campus

Coffey County commissioners heard a multi-part presentation on Aug. 11 about preparing the county-owned site along Old Highway 50 and U.S. 75 (referred to in meeting materials as the "Veo Junction" site) for future industrial development and received an introduction from a private developer who said he would consider buying the property.

The county’s predevelopment consultants from CFS and Burns & McDonnell described a menu of steps to make the parcel more appealing to industrial users — from preliminary civil and architectural site plans to roadway and utility studies, marketing materials and highway improvements along Old Highway 50 and U.S. 75. The consultants said the work can be staged so the county pays only for the level of “shovel-ready” readiness it wants.

Matt, representing CFS/Burns & McDonnell, told the commission the objective is to move the site toward a conventional industrial park model — for warehousing, logistics and distribution — if a semiconductor campus (previously discussed on the site) is no longer the likely end use. "If you stay on as the master developer and you hold onto this property, how do we get it to the next level that's marketable?" Matt asked, explaining utilities-at-property-line and roadway improvements are typical developer requirements.

Developer Gary Pinkston, introduced by local real estate agent Cameron Roth, said his team would be willing to purchase the property and pursue a data‑center campus if the county and utilities can resolve long‑lead items. Pinkston described the site as potentially suitable for multiple data center buildings or a mix of data buildings and other industrial uses and said his group has financing in place. "We have to have about 300 megawatts of power. We got to have 2,000,000 to 4,000,000 gallons of water a day," Pinkston said, describing the level of utility capacity enterprise data centers require.

Pinkston said a purchase would include a multi‑year due diligence window — he described a three‑year period in which his team would secure power and other infrastructure before closing — and that he would expect to run engineering and utility coordination with Burns & McDonnell and county staff. He outlined a conceptual timeline in meeting materials showing several years of engineering and staging; the slide deck presented to commissioners showed a sample 61‑month timeline from contracting through buildout.

Commissioners emphasized caution. Commissioner McCurry and others said the county should pursue information on utility capacity, staging, and whether the county wants to remain the site's master developer or sell. Commissioner Peterson asked for clarity on whether the house carved out of the site would be included in any sale; Pinkston said he would be willing to buy the entire parcel, including the house, or negotiate around an existing tenant. Commissioners asked staff to bring back details, including possible appraisal/value work, and to coordinate with county counsel before any sale discussions or contract drafting.

Why it matters: county‑owned land that was previously advanced for a semiconductor campus remains one of the county’s largest development assets. The options discussed — county-led master development to retain long‑term control versus sale to a private developer — carry different costs and revenue prospects, depend on major outside approvals and utility upgrades, and have multi‑year timelines that affect county budgeting and infrastructure planning.

What comes next: commissioners asked staff to continue due diligence, to coordinate with utilities and Burns & McDonnell on updated water and power assumptions, and to report back with possible appraisal numbers and proposed contract terms before any formal sale or development agreement is considered.